Friday Rant Day: Shut Up and Don't Think

[saffronlie]

At dinner the other night I tried to tell a story about an article I had been reading. The article, without going into too much detail, is a Freudian reading of a children's film. It's funny and well-argued, but the point of my story was the initial absurdist nature of the topic. But I chose my audience incorrectly, for the first comment was, "Why

Comments

[treacleangel]

I like your rants ^_^

It always astonishes me when people just accept and take things at face value. I would have been a sheep too if it wasn't for my 7th form english teacher who taught us to question everything, especially what the media presents us with. Oh its helpful for nursing too, not just doing things cos thats the way its always been done and all that jazz.

Ugh Twilight.It drives me crazy but I just can't stop.

ps. Underbelly has started up again here so we are all once again saying "Dear Matthew Newton" at the telly.

[saffronlie]

Hee. I mentioned Underbelly in my original post but then re-drafted it out. I won't watch it because I think it glamourises crime and violence and personally I try to avoid watching violent films and TV shows because I feel just by watching I am implicitly condoning the violence and crime. Hence I am deprived of Matthew Newton's butt but I think I'll be okay. Of course my family then asked if I wasn't implicitly condoning Matthew's violence against Brooke by continuing to watch him in other films and plays or whatever, but... IT'S A GRAY AREA, okay. :s

[rebness]

Sure, it's just a movie. It's just a book. It's just a story in which women are stripped of all power and reduced to waiting on the sidelines for a strong man to save them.

This is exactly why it's important to pay attention to and interpret the arts, especially when it's something that has so much influence over impressionable younger people.

I see red when people dismiss criticism or analysis as taking the joy out of something (though I do admit it sometimes can) when it's important to voice these things. For example, I remember watching Man on Fire, that stupid, self-important Denzel Washington film wherein he takes bloody, over-the-top revenge on some Mexican kidnappers. My family really enjoyed it, but I was genuinely disturbed at the offhand violence and the somewhat xenophobic depiction of the kidnappers

[saffronlie]

The thing is, whether it's an advertisement or a film or a book, somewhere along the line someone has an agenda. It's really important to realise that even in art, no brush stroke is made without consideration. It's all there for a reason. So at first I was prepared to forgive my friend because hey, she hasn't analysed anything since high school and all she reads are chick lit novels that have no style or substance and wouldn't know symbolism if it appeared to them in a dream. But while I enjoy the occasional chick lit book, I can't pick one up without marveling that this is what the mainstream publishing industry thinks I ought to be reading; this is the book they think I deserve and they've signalled it with a curly font and pastel pink cover. Really, if there's a fault in my thinking it's that I privilege feminist issues first. Man on Fire sounds terrible. I really don't do violence if I can ever help it.

I had to Google Rainbow but that's cute! I also tend to always be like "OMG queerness" when everyone else is like, "What? I see

[hezzabeth]

I agree on the whole twilight thing, it is NOT a harmless love story even if taken at face value. It is a dangerous book that tells girls they are "responsbile for "temping" men into psychotic stalker behavior.

[saffronlie]

Yes, and that really gets lost in the mainstream media's handling of the whole thing, which usually consists of bemusement like "look at all those crazy girls, wow, women sure like vampires huh" when that's really not what Twilight is about or why women like the books at all. I've yet to see anyone prominent raise their voice against Twilight in a public forum -- maybe I should pester Today Tonight to do a story on it? Hehe.

[pandorasblog]

Stephen King has raised his voice against Twilight publicly, but yes, it's disappointing that more prominent people haven't done so. In fairness to other YA and horror writers, though, I suspect that most of them fear for their professional reputations: there can't be that many people in the field whose sales figures compare to Meyer's, and criticism can so easily be twisted by the media to look like sour grapes ("A.N. Other, author of Some Other Teenage Series, lambasted her more successful rival Stephenie Meyer today..."). King still sells so many books that he could probably buy the Moon, so he's safe from such blowback. He's also an out and proud Harry Potter fan, so it's not like people can claim he just doesn't know what Da Kidz like these days.

[podsnappery]

It's just a story in which women are stripped of all power and reduced to waiting on the sidelines for a strong man to save them.

THANK YOU. I have been noticing this theme in so much media lately and have really become bothered by it. The other day, I was watching King Arthur (don't judge me, I love my Keira Knightley haha) and there was a scene wherein Guinevere was fighting off one of the Saxons, and he kind of overpowered her and it looked like she was going to die and I quite literally thought, You know, if the filmmaker is awesome, he'll have her win and defeat him on her own... BUT THEN LANCELOT SLOW-MOTION RAN ACROSS THE FIELD AND SAVED HER. I was so angry at that. I'm so sick of women being treated as subpar to men.

Okay, I'm done, but oh, that bothered me.

[saffronlie]

This trope is EVERYWHERE! Some people seem to use it as the basic building block for a story without any thought. I know I am always way too quick to get feminist-y, but I have to when most movies or TV shows take this stance and mistreat the female characters!

I don't judge you for King Arthur; as an Arthurian nerd I have to get my fix where I can and even though that film pushes my buttons in all the wrong ways (DEAD NARRATOR?? LANCELOT SHOULD BE FRENCH! ETC.) I'd watch it in a pinch. I also love Keira, but agree that her character was done a disservice in that movie. The makers of that one are emphatically not awesome. Thanks for getting that off your chest.

[ibmiller]

Well. Now this is fascinating. Because I find myself simultaneously both passionately agreeing with you, and strongly dissenting

[saffronlie]

It kind of boggles my mind to hear you say that you're not a feminist. It's not just for women, you know! Do you not want equality for the human race? Whatever connotations the word 'feminism' might hold for you, that's its basic meaning.

I haven't read the entire Twilight series, as should be clear. A friend did assert that I could not fully judge the work without reading them all, but she was unable to give me any adequate reason why the whole is necessary to understand the part, or evidence that Bella's character is any different in the later books. Doesn't the second book contain blank pages because the days are meaningless to Bella without Edward in her life?

I am glad to hear that Bella gains some small measure of agency. However, female power isn't the only issue of concern when looking at things from a feminist perspective. There is also, for example, the politics of desire, which are particularly worrying in Twilight, as I briefly mentioned in my post. Edward says that Bella will be responsible should he lose control as a

[ibmiller]

Well, yes, I know feminism's not just for women. But for me, feminism (at least second wave) doesn't mean equality, it means conflict. Third wave or post I have less of a problem with